Taxpayers are understandably upset for having to foot the £2million bill for supporting Keith's ten children until they are 18, but Keith is a winner. Boy, is he ha winner!
Macdonald says he first had sex at the age of 10 and boasts that he has since slept with 40 women – claiming to be “a sex god on £40 a week.”
He fathered his first child at the age of 15 when his then girlfriend, Michelle Purvis, now 32, gave birth to a daughter, Jamie Leigh, who is now 10. When they split up he met Charlotte Anderson, now 25, who had a daughter, Kady, now eight.
Macdonald then met Jordan Banks who was just 15 when he got her pregnant. They had a son, Angelis, who is seven.
June Garrick, now 26, gave birth to his fourth child, Brandon, in October 2003 – a month after Angelis was born. In 2006, he met 17-year-old Stephanie Jubb at a bus stop. She gave birth to their son, Matt, three. Then he started dating Ms Barker, now 22, who gave birth to Emily, now two.
So how can a jobless, "feckless" layabout accomplish this? (Obviously, he is anything but feckless. Keith is smarter than all of us.) I wish I knew. Clearly he is a natural, and I doubt this level of game can be taught. Most men would need to be billionaires or world rulers to have anywhere near this kind of success with women.His seventh child was born after a brief romance with Bec Wright, now 22, who gave birth to Clio, also two. His eighth offspring was Ms Bryant’s daughter, Paige, born five months ago.
Keith is in an altogether different league than even the best PUAs. Roissy, for example, for all his knowledge about pickup, is missing something essential. Roissy does not want children. Not wanting marriage is understandable. I don't think I would want to get married either under conditions of marriage 2.0 if I were the kind of man women want. But not wanting to impregnate women is a sentiment I can only shake my head at. It is all very well to get to fuck all those women, of course, but in the end, isn't it halfway pointless if you subvert the actual fundamental reason for having sex? Keith Macdonald has understood it. The last laugh will be his.
Just to get an idea of how much sex it takes to father that many children:
Given that the probability of conception per coital act is estimated to be about .03, a man must have 33 extrapair copulation partners (with whom he has sex once each) in order to be able to expect to produce one child (number of potential conception = .99). A man can produce roughly the same number of children with one sexual partner with whom he has regular sex (twice a week) (number of potential conception = .96).And that's assuming they don't use contraception. You would have to fuck 330 women once each to have ten kids, or ten women 33 times. This is what Keith has been doing, all in ten years from he was 15 to 25 while stupid betas have to work and pay. Great for him, not so good for society. I would certainly never stoop so low as to be a net taxpayer and work to pay for another man's spawn, but I am magnanimous enough to congratulate Keith Macdonald on his magnificent success in life.
Why are women drawn to men behind bars?
"it is clear that the women he gets are hot"
I don't think you are being very objective about this:
I agree that he has done pretty well concidering his lack of status, but to me it seems that a huge part of the reason for his "success" is that he barely have any standard at all.
Well, I still think all those women are attractive and most of them are hot. Claiming otherwise just sounds like sour grapes to me, perhaps a delusion you have to maintain in order to live with yourself for going to work and paying taxes so low-class lazy men can have all the pussy and genetic legacy. Keith is getting an endless supply of young fertile women, and all he has to do is pick them up at bus stops... It boggles the mind that this is even possible. The vast majority of men could never do this no matter what, and it's certainly not a matter of having low standards. Having a fetish for skinny girls does not equal standards, you know, though some men like to pretend so. Whatever Keith is doing, he is doing the right thing for himself, but I have to agree with the Conservative politician quoted in the article about the dysgenic implications:
"We’re going to have a system where the middle classes are discouraged from breeding because it’s jolly expensive, but for those on benefit there is every incentive. Well, that’s not very sensible."
It's pretty obvious how he pulls the birds, as they say over there. He's tall and handsome. Duh. Most men don't desire to spawn bastard legions anyway, they usually want one or two kids and spend all their money and time taking care of them, so it's perfectly smart for the ladies to throw themselves at him. Because of course, usually men are there to pick up the tab, so having random sex knowing well they might get impregnated is usually a winning ticket for them, because most men don't think like this guy.
He is rather cute for English standards (even though rather scruffy) and it appears he tries to put on some street style which is appealing to very young women. Those girls are all at least a couple of points below him visually. If he has a sweet, charming personality, then he can easily pull these chubby plain lasses.
Unfortunately, these simple, so called "lower class" people don't use contraception. Thus, the burden on society. It's good that kids are being had, but this is not the right way. Such behaviour should not be tolerated in men.
Seriously, you think those women are hot? Only one of them looks like she isn't overweight and she is not pretty. What do you actually consider to be NOT hot? Over 70 years of age? So fat that she can't get out of bed? I know they say beggars can't be choosers, but dude, don't you have any standards at all?
Yes, they are hot. It is very difficult for young women not to be hot. It is also difficult for women over 50 to be hot. So I do have one standard: youth. I used to not even have that, but now I feel being of reproductive age is important, for a long term relationship at least.
Women certainly don't lose any points from me for being chubby. They don't need to go out of their way to become fat though. Donna Simpson is still cute and I would fuck her of course, but I don't encourage that sort of overeating and think it is extremely unhealthy.
Donna Simpson is still cute and I would fuck her of course
...butt of course.
Seriously, sexual starvation is no proper explanation for wanting to fuck this monster. Every guy has a limit to how much disgust he's willing to take for sex, whether it be Donna Simpson, rape, fucking a corpse or whatever. You just seem to be on the margins most of these scales. I completely agree there's a lot of online posturing going on in the PUA community, and a lot of men have similar low standards such as yourself if pussy starved enough. But you really are on the extremes when it comes to low standards, apparent need and how far you're willing to go for it.
Anyway this guy looks like a typical live fast die young type of simpleton, if he's alive after 40, the last thing women would want with him is to have kids.
My lack of attraction to these women has little to do with their looks and much to do with what must be a pretty calamitously low IQ.
If they're stupid enough to get themselves impregnated by someone who is clearly a human weasel, it's unlikely that they'd have much of an erotic imagination - and that's a complete turn-off from the start.
No, extreme would be the men paying to watch Donna Simpson eat.
I agree it's even more out there for heterosexual men to pay 600 pound women to watch them eat than to pay to have sex with them. But it's still pretty far out there.
People like him will inherit the earth. Who will pay for them I don't know.
The article has the usual spin. In the UK and rest of Europe, millions of Middle Eastern and African men expect society to pay for them and their large families on some sort of benefit perhaps after a few years of lazy work, where their large flock of kids then again grow up as adults who import "unspoiled" girls and male cousins for the guys, who then again too become massive welfare drainers. THAT'S the problem, not ONE bloody chav getting lucky all the time. And the only reason why he's successful as an interloper is just because he's so different from most guys, so it won't turn into an epidemic.
And who's to say his kids don't grow up successes? Their parents are young, and their father is handsome... So the possibility of beautiful daughters is pretty good. And what do we need more than beautiful working class girls ready to do whatever it takes to climb the ladder of success? Especially in England. Not much that I can think of. And their father is lazy because he can, so it's a virtue really. Of course if he's a complete dope too so will his children tend to be, but if he has male children I wouldn't assume they become unproductive just because he is, I know tons of lazy, talented guys. As you say, he's doing just fine doing nothing. People from certain parts of the world tend to have unproductive kids with a very high probability, though.
How many white guys do know like him? I know a lot of people, and I've can't think of anyone I know who WANTS a ton of illegitimate kids. It's just a ton of problems.
In fact, if you want an example of just little the average Norwegian guy cares about his own reproduction, just look at the sperm bank situation. Norwegian men couldn't be bothered to spread their genes without obligation even for money just by going somewhere and whacking off. And it's in the news regularly, it's not like it's happened once or twice.
Also, the article conveniently misses the whole problem. If you read about these women's kids, they will probably barely have 2 children each, and the kids are not that unlikely to be productive. In fact, having kids with an alpha like Keith is far preferable for men than having them with the butt ugly plumber who would stay with them because he had no choices, in that case their female offspring would be ugly too.
The problem would be if they were having 10 kids each and expecting society to basically take care of them, and then the kids would repeat the cycle. Which, again, is the case with large European immigrant communities today.
The more you look at this, the more fucked up it becomes from a genetic perspective. Obviously anyone who wants to stay with these hags, on average, with exceptions of course, will probably be less attractive than this guy, and older. So we have ugly versus good looking daughters. I know which one I want.
But their prospective husbands aren't likely to be tall either, and certainly not very young or bright on average. So their sons are more likely to become unproductive losers. Tall, not too smart guys are exactly what we need, though. They need to lead all the shorter, dumber guys to become productive citizens. So all in all, it looks like the next generation of chavs will be an improvement on the last, so no problem really.
This guy outdoes MacDonald!
where are you apargus? would be cool to hear your views on the lastest bombing.
I've got a post up about it now: http://eivindberge.blogspot.com/2011/07/anders-breivik-paleoconservative.html
To all of you on here some of the women had their child before he hit the papers, what none of you have said is the fact that macdonald has spawned these children then ran, he might not think anything of his children but the mothers do, I now this fron experience. I was 6 months pregnent when he hit the papers and calling the women that have looked after these children I do not think is acseptable. And the fact that you have missed him moving fron woman to women discrases me if there is some on to be slagged off it is him if you don't think this you are as bad as him.
Post a Comment